Narrative reality

I read a tweet from @MaxKeiser about the Batman massacre, half an hour after it happened. Like so many events, the random killing of people in a cinema attracted global attention. It took less than 24 hours not only to have the facts reported, 12 people killed and over 50 wounded, and a prime suspect being arrested after the shooting, but also have people talking all over the globe.

The alleged killer, with hair dyed red, wearing SWAT gear and a gas mask, had his flat booby-trapped with some sophisticated bombs that could have easily killed unsuspecting intruders. The mayhem started by someone entering through an emergency exit, throwing a smoke bomb and then the shooting started.

Basically, we know little more in terms of facts about this event. Yet our minds want to know more. We got exposed to a vicarious trauma, which needs transformation or it will lodge into our psyche. We know instinctively that something 'wrong' happened, luckily not to us. The circumstances suggest that it could happen to us, we can easily identify with going to the movies to watch some spectacular emotional roller coaster made in Hollywood.

Human nervous systems have been prewired to perceive injustice, and our minds demand closure. This means either believing that this event can't be repeated, or that some sort of punishment is dished out to the perpetrator. A psychopath on the loose creates nightmares for the community, understanding this event as a cruel 'act of god' allows the grieving process to start.

The 'lone gunman' narratives describes the current official reading of the story, no worries, we got him in jail, mourn your dead and move on. However, living in the age of web 2.0, of social media, 'talking points' find entirely new ways of being evaluated. The diversity of opinions on the interwebs approaches infinity, and random webs of connections make memes traverse the globe with increasing speed.

We don't even need to wait for some TV team to present their cluelessness, or some pre-scripted version of events, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube quench our thirst for information faster than any single commercial entity ever could. Media consumption has many of us desensitised towards random blood spilling, unless we identify the victims with our in-group. While we're used to hundreds of victims in bombing in the Middle East, massacres in the 'center of current civilisation' make it easier to appeal to our empathy glands.

The preparation for the Batman massacre opens the door to many questions, especially as to how this could all happen. Without a forensic reconstruction of the timeline of this event asking why he did it can't lead to useful conclusion. At this stage, we can't even conclusively say whether James Holmes has killed anyone. A movie theatre filled with smoke makes positive identification nearly impossible, especially of someone wearing a gas mask.

We haven't heard a confession of Holmes on record. During his court appearance he didn't say a word, and looked drugged. Ostensibly, he informed police upon his arrest about the booby-traps in his apartment, another detail that raises suspicion. The Joker, which he impersonated, would have enjoyed blowing up cops, remorse or respect for uniforms seems out of character.

The loner/nutcase explanation remains easiest to come to some closure, without really changing the vicarious trauma. The idea of a complex psy-op offers an alternative path to closure, and doesn't necessarily work out better to deal with the trauma. Although Ireland, Spain and Greece currently demonstrate how little governments hesitate to act against their people, condemning them to poverty and starvation to make some friends filthy rich, blind trust in government is one of aims of state education that usually sticks.

For now, we can only conclude that something really fishy goes on when the official narrative sticks with lone gunman myth. But then, seeing chemtrails on a regular basis might convince you as well to scrutinise messages from media and government a bit more thoroughly.

The Olympic Games in London start.on Friday, I doubt that we'll hear a convincing story from official sources. I wonder whether there's some important date within the Games, I hope David Icke chose the timing of his event well, otherwise the Batman Massacre might look tiny in comparison to London. It certainly withdraw the focus of the security screw up from G4S, which invited many ideas about the next 911 to finalise the NWO takeover (or however you call a prison planet, or global fascism, or One World Government, or Neo Feudalism, or Check mate for mankind, or what ever).

Yet, unless you know someone who was sitting in the Aurora theatre, or someone who was involved in its preparation, you can easily find solace by some simple considerations. It doesn't really matter what exactly happened. But the probability to fall victim to such an event is really small, lottery millions kind of small. Sharks and lightning will get you faster, and if the endgame has begun (and have any idea what endgame means) then better prepare yourself.

If we want to save this planet, everyone is needed. If the endgame continues, most people are dispensable. However, the people, united, can never be defeated. Sweet dreams of the Dark Knight.

Finalised Matters

I've been to the Magistrate's Court several times now, yet never before encountered such a long queue to get inside. Armed with some paper work, I made it inside, just to find out that my case wasn't listed.

I heard also that there is no case listed for next week, so the at least the prosecutor kept this part of the promise. Later today, I received the letter confirming that I don't need to appear again. It's dated two days later than the adjournment letter I received last week, kind of amazing how long delivery within the same city can take.

So at least this episode of living in a police state worked out positive at the hand. Not only didn't I have to pay any fines, I guess at least Melbourne Bike Patrol will leave me alone when I'm unicycling. To quote my prosecutor: These matters are now finalised.

On the brink

The middle of the solar year has just gone, winter solstice in the Southern Hemisphere, summer solstice in the Northern. 2012, the year of many apocalyptic prophecies and even more apocalyptic policies. The empire increases its effort to quench human spirit and enslave the majority of the population.

A glimpse of hope emerged last year with Occupy Wall Street and its many memetic offspring. More and more people world wide not only liberated themselves from the idea that 'government cares for all', but also started caring for each other and get organised.

The wrath of the Empire came fast and vile, filled prisons and thus lined the pockets of the private prison industry like Serco or Wackenhut. The disneyfied news media reported diligently about yet another futile violent protest, elegantly omitting any useful information.

Hundred thousands protest in Mexico against a stolen election, similar numbers protest in Spain against being enslaved to pay for some gambling bankers debt. Japan rises against the use of nuclear power with hundred thousands. Greeks hardly stayed calm since the IMF and Germany took their country over. The middle East is still boiling, hotter than ever.

The traces of the implementation of the New World Order are plenty and wide spread. Without going too far back into conspiratorial history, IMF, WTO and World Bank might be the governance to implement the Agenda 21, an official plan to save the planet.

Cool, not only is there some understanding that this planet needs saving, there's even a masterplan for it. Hold your horses, not everything might be as attractive as it seems in first place. 'Saving the planet from environmental destruction' is only the sales point of a plan that identifies mankind as biggest obstacle towards a 'sustainable planet'.

I admit, I want to save the planet. Not singlehandedly, as mythical hero archetype, rather in cooperation with like-minded people. I don't believe in the Messiah myth, which keeps our fixation to leaders alive. Self-organising groups of people have shaped the face of this planet, and this eternal principle of (human) life cannot be broken.

Yet a weird game determines the amount of resources available to any specific group of people on this planet. Since the invention of the magic scheme called 'legislation' a large part of the global population is forcefully put under its evil spell. The historic empires eradicated custodians of their lands, and replaced them with lesser wizards with the responsibility to maintain the magic spell of law.

Domestication of conquered people followed usually similar patterns, if they survived at all. Their cultural identity was subverted to subdue to the rules of the conqueror, from total ban to replacing just the top of the hierarchy.

The latest threat to the hierarchy comes ostensibly from machines. The creation myth of most contemporary societies portraits strict hierarchy as a given, and inevitable. Somebody's got to do the nasty job of bossing the rest around, and many societies regard this as a family affair. Soon, we can retire them, and have some machines bossing mankind around.

It's all for the best of all. My synapses scream and sigh simultaneously while writing something so wickedly Orwellian. While science still largely shies away from the exploration of consciousness, and has only ill-defined concepts of 'intelligence', Artificial Intelligence will blow us away. Or a comet. Or an alien attack. Or global warming. Or the sun exploding. Or the Oil Crisis. Or the Food Crisis. Or the Water Crisis.

When some people think about the future, they often see their biggest fears magnified. While contemplating plans about my individual future these 'globally accepted threats' want some attention. But they don't get it in their designed ways. I can choose whether to subscribe to the idea of humans as helpless, inferior beings needing a guiding hand for anything or whether to accept the challenge of free will.

Depending on the circumstances, we have been programmed to prefer everything 'just like it is', including a self-perception as unimportant and replaceable cog in a much, much larger wheel. Many lack the imagination required to consider a world without the big wheel government as desirable. Media provides us with a plethora of dystopian memes, which clutter our ideas about a potential future.

Assuming that most people on this planet are harmless, a cooperative society emerges easily. The biggest mistake in perceiving a future society lies in taking every bit of the now and converting it into a better working equivalent. Most of the jobs done today are entirely redundant, to keep people busy and reinforce their conditioning on a daily basis.

One essential area for human survival has already largely moved into the hands of the corporate Empire: food. Other omnivores on this planet require about twenty hours per week caring about food, it makes us look quite stupid in comparison if we aim for 40 hours a week. At least in most industrialised countries, homelessness reflects just economic inequality, not a scarcity of resources.

Although a lot of damage to the environment needs active repairing/healing, in average we would do much less in terms of 'job'. If essentials like water, electricity, heating, shelter, communication infrastructure come for free (and there is no compelling reason why it can't be so), the jobs for 'competing for the best offer in these services' go away.

We have developed more than enough technology and products to ensure a comfortable life for every human being on this planet. As of yet, this comfortable life would hardly be sustainable, as most economic processes have been optimised for 'profit', while neglecting efficient (economic) solutions. Transforming the industries we need and want as mankind towards sustainability, that means conscious of the interdependence of mankind to this ecosphere we call planet Earth, sounds like an insurmountable task.

Yet since the idea of ecology became more popular in the 70s of the last century, it raised already the general awareness about environmental concerns, and led to some positive steps towards sustainability. However, this environmental awareness gets now hijacked by the proponents of the Agenda 21, which want to save the ecosystem by culling the majority of humans.

The future remains unpredictable, although some consequences of maintaining the current status quo become very apparent. Especially the contamination with radioactivity, in combination with the exposure to dangerous chemicals erodes life expectation and general health, not only in humans, but in the entire chain of life.

Liberating this planet from its parasitic leadership only begins the next step of evolution. A memetic shift needs to prepare the majority of people not to panic once the emperors without clothes have gone.

Deceit instead of defeat?

Going to court last tuesday didn't turn out to be fun. The combination of little sleep, public transport and Melbourne winter weather turned into a cold which still lingers around a bit. It eased a little bit when Sergeant Mark Stephens rang me up to tell me about his decision, whether to prosecute me for unicycling without a bike helmet or not.

While I stayed much calmer on the phone than at court, Sgt. Stephens sounded a bit apprehensive. He stated, however, that the both charges against me were dropped. My vague information about the second charge was enough to find it, so after patiently listening and making sure that I got him right, I asked for a written confirmation about the charges being dropped.

His reaction seemed a bit odd to me at the time, as if I should simply rely on his word. He even asked for my address. I'm quite sure there will be a file with my name available to him, but I went along anyway. The easiest way to prosecute someone is certainly to prevent the defendant from showing up.

So i asked Sgt Stephens for a written confirmation before the date of the second charge (July 30th), and was surprised to find a letter from the Magistrate Court today, as he suggested it might take time for this written admission of error.

What I got though was an 'Advice of hearing', stating my first charge was adjourned for a 'mention' on the 24th. So far, it looks like the second broken promise by people in Vic Police uniform. If it wasn't a silly game, I would turn the attack around and start suing Vic Police for harassment. However, mentioning harassment in person to one of perpetrators seems more satisfying than deploying a phony legal system against itself.

Another opportunity to stay calm while speaking truth to power, hidden behind a uniform swearing allegiance to the genocidal British crown. At least I now know what to expect, and might have some fun with the interaction after all.

Law and justice

I went to the Magistrate's Court today, as I am officially charged with the 'summary offense' of failing to wear a bike helmet on a unicycle. It helped a lot to have been there before, and knowing bits of the proceedings that apply to 'offenders' like me.

Instead of seeing the Magistrate to explain as to why a unicycle is not a bike, although it was legally defined as one until 2009, I had a bit of a talk to some of the prosecutors. Paper is patient, it's perfectly possible to fill it with lots of contradiction without the medium being affected in any way. I lost my patience a bit, and still managed to pick some interesting information on the way.

The charge itself needs some intellectual detours to make sense. There is the mismatch between 'unicycle' and 'bicycle helmet', which could make people suspicious in first place. Then again, law is not about common sense. If common sense would play a larger role in everyday life, we wouldn't need a plethora of laws, which, according to the prosecutor I spoke to, can't be known in its entirety even by police men.

The charge contained a hard copy of the dictionary of Victoria's road rules, the green marked part defines a bicycle as plenty of things, including unicycle. However, the part marked in red states the version of the legal text, it is from1999.

The law applicable to the charge, referred to on the summary sheet, clearly states Road Safety Road Rules of 2009 as the bit I ostensibly offended against. Okay, I admit, once things get defined in the law to ease fining citizens, it seems unlikely that a law will change to reflect common sense again. The current version of the law reflects what determines a bicycle, and legally distinguishes between uni- and bi-cycle.

When I mentioned that I felt harassed by the treatment of Constable Tyrell, the prosecutor mentioned that Vic Police is entitled to do a lot more than just stopping me and taking my details. In a way, it seemed like in the Stanford Prison experiment, the person in uniform emanating a sense of entitlement and infallibility.

Superficially, the entire case looks more than ridiculous. Besides the cognitive dissonance required to consider a unicycle the same as a bike, using two versions of the same legal text in the same bunch of documents shows how little scrutiny for detail the people dealing with this charge displayed.

I never had a court case before, and being considered as an 'offender' fails to instigate any confidence in the legal system. My crime: unicycling. How outrageous. How socially inacceptable. How non-conforming.

I guess the implicit attempt to shift blame towards me got my Liver Qi rising. While at least one Melbourne Bike Patrolero admitted his error, just like in Terry Gilliam's Brazil, 'officials' don't like admitting mistakes.

The shocking admission that police men 'don't know all the laws' and are entitled to random activities that seem to me just like harassment doesn't raise confidence into the local authorities at all. If common sense goes overboard, and people in uniform act like street robbers, the notion of a 'free' society has died.

So what the friendly prosecutor communicated was 'follow orders from police, no matter whether they are in line with legislation or not'. Don't feel harassed for being hindered in your ways, treated like a criminal, having to spend time and money to make those who 'protect the law' read the laws in first place. What a brave new world.

Making the world a sadder place with shoes

In a lot of parts of the world walking barefoot was the norm for millennia. I love the sensation of walking barefoot, and while the 'civilised' environment isn't the nicest to walk on, using barefoot shoes is the next best thing. I happily confess wearing shoes for the last three years or so that provide a similar amount of feedback from the ground like walking barefoot, while providing a lot of protection from things you might step on.

As bodyworker, I advocate freedom for the feet, although it might remove my client's necessity for treatment. Evolution provided us with the a thick skin under our feet, which moved us through all sort of terrains. But then, all I have is my personal experience, my own understanding of the evolutionary process and potentially the support of a minority of like-minded people. I obviously lack the impulse to do good by preventing harm at all costs.

The One on One Movement is a different kettle of fish. Blake Mycoskie went to Argentina and saw not only barefoot people (o shock, o horror!), he also saw the terrors of a shoeless existence:

Why shoes?

Many children in developing countries grow up barefoot. Whether at play, doing chores or going to school, these children are at risk:

•A leading cause of disease in developing countries is soil-transmitted diseases, which can penetrate the skin through bare feet. Wearing shoes can help prevent these diseases, and the long-term physical and cognitive harm they cause.

•Wearing shoes also prevents feet from getting cuts and sores. Not only are these injuries painful, they also are dangerous when wounds become infected.

•Many times children can't attend school barefoot because shoes are a required part of their uniform. If they don't have shoes, they don't go to school. If they don't receive an education, they don't have the opportunity to realize their potential.

Oh my god, disease and infection lurk in the soil, and children miss out in their conditioning to become a worker bee. And, for fornication's sake, it's children AT RISK! Would somebody pleeeeeeeeeease think about the kids!

So let's imagine a small Argentinian village, subsiding on agriculture, and engaging a bit in crafts and trade. What kind of problems might a place like that face, after the reign of US supported dictators, a total economic crashes in the 80s of the last century?

Good Man: Hello, villager, I came here to help the children.

Villager: Hello, wow, that's fantastic! Welcome!

( Friendly hug follows)

V: We can need some help....

GM: That's what I thought as well

V: Access to clean water would be great

GM: Sure.

V: And with the high taxes we struggle to bring food onto the table

GM: That's bad.

V: There's no hospital and no doctors around.

GM: Well, I'm sorry to hear that. I can't really help you directly with any of this, but indirectly.

V: What do you mean?

GM: I got shoes.

V: ???

GM: With shoes your kids can walk to the water supply, and keep their feet sheltered on the long way a doctor. 

V: We have shoe makers, but not all of us want and can afford to wear shoes all the time.

GM: Shoes protect your children from harm.

V: Why not a wind generator?

GM: Shoes. Everyone is better off with a pair of shoes.

V: Or some solar panels?

GM: Shoes. Step into the new world.

V: A new communal well?

GM: Shoes is what I got, shoes is what you get.

V: Shoes?

GM: Shoes. Your kids will just love them, trust me.

V: O my, I get the shoes blues... (walks away barefoot)

Donating and sharing seem and sound similar, yet they are worlds apart. By donating a specific good, one subverts the existing local market and creates a dependency. That way, much of African food production was undermined and heavily damaged, just to be picked for cheap by foreign companies. 

The shoe economy might be less essential for survival than food production, yet mankind has evolved far from being instinctively driven food processors (although some revert for shorter or longer periods of time into such a state). A free and just world won't be poor, only the promoters of the status quo insist on austerity as primary survival strategy. 

If I share life-sustaining knowledge (how to cook, grow food, heal, arts, crafts) I empower the receiver, If I share life-sustaining resources (food, shelter, attention) I also empower the receiver, by assisting and easing his/her survival needs. Donations don't empower, and might contribute to more problems than were helped initially.

So while it's honourable to engage in a good cause, it's much easier to help your own community. Not that it doesn't matter how well off our remote brothers and sisters are, without a personal connection we wouldn't know anyway. Unless, of course, unless everyone is better off with a pair of shoes.

8 circuits programming

Human experience is a wonderful thing, in fact, it's the only way the human form can access 'reality'. Behaviour depends largely on how well our needs are met, the environment around us. Yet what we perceive as our needs determines whether we nurture our 'self' or our 'false ego'.

It doesn't seem very common in the Western World to reflect on one's elementary needs, and the way we fulfil them. We don't need to reflect at all - most living beings very successfully master the school of life without self-aware thoughts. At least as far as we can tell.

Reflecting our own behaviour, the way we interact and connect to other and our environment, makes us human. Cultural behaviour patterns changed drastically over the centuries, yet consciousness creates also patterns of communality. Competition and cooperation describe one basic axis along which organisation happens, not mutually exclusive but in a blend of method, intention and challenge.

Exclusiveness describes best the most hazardous programming of the contemporary matrix. It's one of those words describing an 'ideal' situation which as such cannot exist in this universe. It's a part of the Aristotelian toolkit to stupefy the masses, distracting from the essential unity of all living beings.

Like Madonna in her song 'Material Girl', it's a common assumption in the general population that we live in a 'material' world. We get programmed to operate in a world of matter, manipulation 'real' things all the time. Matter, however, turns out to be a very persistent illusion, and much less solid than commonly believed.

Magic begins for a lot of people already in the realm of electronics, bits and bytes exceed comprehension. Or take at least some moments to be understood. Bits and bytes are the 'stuff' programs are made of, and the stuff programs manipulate. Data and program become indistinguishable unless they operate in their designed context.

Once the context is known, a mere 'data dump' allows to reconstruct the algorithm as well as the data. Hackers use this method to extract data from memory or to reverse engineer software. The human mind, the infallible tool exclusively exquisite in its evolutionary emanation, cannot fall prey to any hacking, or can it?

Whether minds can be hacked or not, a lot of money is made in selling specific methods to do it. NLP, Scientology or 'The Secret' taps into the desire to better control the outcome of interactions in our favour.

I ascribe much of these method's success to the fact that most human minds come pre-programmed with propaganda anyway. The global memepool is currently dominated by the most belligerent society in known history, maintaining a dystopic view of reality. The Disneyverse looks harmless on first sight, yet it sells mainly sex and violence.

The magic wands of Hollywood prepare gullible humans for a life of disguised slavery, serving a psychopathic minority that consider this planet their 'exclusive' playground. Lulled into the illusion that we as mankind are smarter than ever in history false believes enter irresistibly into the minds of the manipulated masses.

Civilisations have come and gone in known history, and most likely as well in unknown history. We covered our nudity fairly soon after our 'appearance' as species, displaying our ability to develop technology already 100,000s of years ago. We can only guess about the level of sophistication of bygone civilisations, assuming their inferiority shows pure hybris.

It seems likely that 'empires' emerged after civilisations. Cooperation yields collective advantages and creates wealth. As warfare doesn't contribute to the essential survival needs of a group, it requires a certain level of wealth to exist before it can manifest.

As humans required technology to transform from part of the food chain to the top predator the need for safety arose from the existence of highly successful predators that simply didn't respect our authority as masters of the universe. Lions, tigers, bears, even wolves and foxes just so survived the genocidal attacks of a mankind possessed by the idea of owning this planet.

If we know our environment, it provides us abundantly. The amount of mass migration following genocides, combined with environmental destruction of sparsely populated areas like rain forests means that less cultures survived in the 21st century which could share their ancient knowledge how to live on this planet.

Luckily, information cannot be destroyed unless it enters a black hole. While many lineages have been broken or distorted, it only requires the proper program to access the global consciousness. As each of us connects to the cosmic consciousness, many ways for individual access exist.

Unless many good teachers roam this planet, reprogramming yourself to venture into your own life, instead of following a carrot and stick drill on a daily basis, requires at least some work. Without doing things (thought experiments don't count) you will get stuck in your program. Customising your mind provides so much more fun than any cool desktop background.

While sharks still make the news on a yearly basis for chewing on humans, the statistical probability to fall prey to a predator are pretty low. The mosquito, combined with the Gates Foundation's greed, warrant most 'animal caused' human deaths. The fear of being hunted down transformed into the fear of being hunted down by diseases, which became our 'natural enemy'.

Again, the programming puts the perception into a slanted perspective. We learned to prevent causes of diseases, at least to a certain degree. Life style remains the Holy Grail that cannot be changed for the sake of better health. We have been deluded to mistake some wants for our needs. We want a quick fix, salvation now, which often seems like a disguised death wish.

Predators exist, diseases exist, nevertheless these threats to human survival seem essentially manageable, given a deeper understanding into the nature of life. Evolution necessitates maintaining and restoring health, we're the first species to have specialists for this task.

Not only have we found methods to extend individual life spans by some amazing medical procedures, we also can heal injuries of animals we favour to survive. The life around us supports us, provides us with the energy for own metabolism, and we developed means to support life in return.

Yet as long as we get stuck with the Armageddon programming that permeates many mainstream media productions, the abundance of solution for an seemingly insurmountable amount of problems remains invisible.

While it takes quite some time to program the subconscious from outside, it can be re-programmed amazingly fast. If something within the human nature resembles a computer, it's the binary structure of our subconscious.

On autopilot, we don't have time to evaluate complex data collections, binary decisions provide immediate action. Sex and safety belong to the essential triggers to activate subconscious programming, even the suggestion usually suffices to induce either mild arousal/desire or fear or both at the same time.

As most of us spend only little time per day truly 'conscious', especially in situation where our primary buttons are pressed, our subconscious programming determines most of our behaviour. As long as it is our own, there's no need to worry. Most programs, however, were implemented non-consensual as part of the cultural inheritance of the society we grew up in.

The implemented programs need reinforcement to stay active - two weeks holiday might be enough to losen the circuits, two days of rat race usually suffice to revert any positive effect. Withdrawal certainly works to a degree, yet it's less efficient than directly addressing the subconscious programming.

Removing some or much of cultural programming sharpens the lenses of perception. Once we understand how smoke and mirrors work, we can easier experience what's really there. A beautiful fractal pattern in perpetual motion: Life in this universe.